Re:I'm a liberal professor, and my liberal students terrify me
by coldtea on Sunday August 28, 2016 @09:19AM
(#12376382)
Really? Because tons of articles are posted multiples times -- to the point that people post comments with links to previous HN discussions of the same article, to help others get the whole picture.
And judging from the content of the article, which I'm first reading now, I don't see how anybody would think that the axe the article grinds is not legitimate.
Re:I'm a liberal professor, and my liberal students terrify me
by tnzn on Sunday August 28, 2016 @09:17AM
(#12376376)
funny thing is, liberals means everything and its contrary in US society. Here you're talking about neoliberalism. You could have called them conservative as well, from what I see.
Also, the attempt to divide harm into physical and emotionnal harm and saying that physical harm is worse than emotionnal harm which is supposedly normal and needed, is just bullshit. You've got to go past dualism. The question is not wether you harm someone or not but to which extent the person is harmed, and if the answer should be to adapt your behavior so as not to harm others or if, in said case, it's the person that has to adapt in order to not feel harmed.
That is, saying all black people are being assisted by society may harm a black person's feeling, so, should the black man not give a fuck and let such hateful and totally nonsense speech spread, or should the person who said that adapt his behavior and keep such nocive thoughts to himself as well as get an proper education ?
Re:I'm a liberal professor, and my liberal students terrify me
by coldtea on Sunday August 28, 2016 @09:25AM
(#12376403)
Nope, neoliberalism is not what he means. Neoliberalism is about pro-banks, pro-corporate, pro-small-government economic ideas.
Wikipedia: Neoliberalism (neo-liberalism) refers primarily to the 20th century resurgence of 19th century ideas associated with laissez-faire economic liberalism.
What the author refers to is "liberals" as in "liberal studies". Political correctness, victimhood, etc mostly, but also how the same things are used by the conservative.
He does start with a 2009 example of being accused as a "communist", but the gist of his article is not about the same ideological origin of accussations, but about the emergence of this whole new climate where you can't hurt anyone's "feelings", etc.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9654710 (a year ago, 55 comments)
And judging from the content of the article, which I'm first reading now, I don't see how anybody would think that the axe the article grinds is not legitimate.
Also, the attempt to divide harm into physical and emotionnal harm and saying that physical harm is worse than emotionnal harm which is supposedly normal and needed, is just bullshit. You've got to go past dualism. The question is not wether you harm someone or not but to which extent the person is harmed, and if the answer should be to adapt your behavior so as not to harm others or if, in said case, it's the person that has to adapt in order to not feel harmed.
That is, saying all black people are being assisted by society may harm a black person's feeling, so, should the black man not give a fuck and let such hateful and totally nonsense speech spread, or should the person who said that adapt his behavior and keep such nocive thoughts to himself as well as get an proper education ?
Wikipedia: Neoliberalism (neo-liberalism) refers primarily to the 20th century resurgence of 19th century ideas associated with laissez-faire economic liberalism.
What the author refers to is "liberals" as in "liberal studies". Political correctness, victimhood, etc mostly, but also how the same things are used by the conservative.
He does start with a 2009 example of being accused as a "communist", but the gist of his article is not about the same ideological origin of accussations, but about the emergence of this whole new climate where you can't hurt anyone's "feelings", etc.